Decade or two too early
The Zuck is easily a decade or two early. And that's being optimistic.
1. Graphics:
The vr cartoon verse certainly hasn't the fidelity of even middling flat screen games from the last decade. Just that alone is off putting. Never mind that many folks find current vr less than ideal (motion wise) for anything longer than half hour.
2. Headsets: weight, size and resolution - as the owner of a g2, I can see raw resolution and ability might be only a couple of generations out from ideal. However, I was a vr enthusiast and yet more than an hour using any vr, and I need to stop. It doesn't feel like something for extended, detailed and concentrated work.
3. Touch: to mean anything, we need to touch this world. Otherwise it stays very flat, boring and sterile. No matter how good looking, if we can't feel it, it won't have longevity. It differs from flatscreen games as they aren't asking you to immerse yourself into a replacement 3D world. Vr does.
4. Compute capacity: related to the point about graphics really. An ordinary bargain basement business pc will actually require, routinely, rtx 4090ti level gpu capacity to deliver 90fps with unreal engine 5 like detail on vr. I may be being optimistic.
The point is, hardware tight IT depts will buy won't be high end rigs. If this is to be mass business use, then very ordinary boxes need to be able to use it.
5. Use cases: outside of virtual design work (gravity sketch is lovely for example) and virtual tours, what is the business case that isn't covered by video and phone, email and slack and... Gasp... Live in person? FYI I wfh :P.
Hardware wise, we are about a decade early, maybe more for a good mass adoption of a great meta verse. And even there I'm being optimistic.
And ignoring security, privacy and safety issues.
I don't believe Zuck has this right and I'm a vr enthusiast and loved Snow Crash and other tales with those concepts in.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
